What do you think?
Rate this book
Smarter: The New Science of Building Brain Power
Can you make yourself, your kids, and your parents smarter?
Expanding upon one of the most-read New York Times Magazine features of 2012, Smarter penetrates the hot new field of intelligence research to reveal what researchers call a revolution in human intellectual abilities. Shattering decades of dogma, scientists began publishing studies in 2008 showing that “fluid intelligence”—the ability to learn, solve novel problems, and get to the heart of things—can be increased through training.
But is it all just hype? With vivid stories of lives transformed, science journalist Dan Hurley delivers practical findings for people of every age and ability. Along the way, he narrates with acidtongued wit his experiences as a human guinea pig, road-testing commercial brain-training programs, learning to play the Renaissance lute, getting physically fit, even undergoing transcranial directcurrent stimulation.
Smarter speaks to the audience that made bestsellers out of Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain and Moonwalking with Einstein.
Expanding upon one of the most-read New York Times Magazine features of 2012, Smarter penetrates the hot new field of intelligence research to reveal what researchers call a revolution in human intellectual abilities. Shattering decades of dogma, scientists began publishing studies in 2008 showing that “fluid intelligence”—the ability to learn, solve novel problems, and get to the heart of things—can be increased through training.
But is it all just hype? With vivid stories of lives transformed, science journalist Dan Hurley delivers practical findings for people of every age and ability. Along the way, he narrates with acidtongued wit his experiences as a human guinea pig, road-testing commercial brain-training programs, learning to play the Renaissance lute, getting physically fit, even undergoing transcranial directcurrent stimulation.
Smarter speaks to the audience that made bestsellers out of Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain and Moonwalking with Einstein.
275 pages, Hardcover
First published December 13, 2013
93 people are currently reading
1428 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 115 reviews
May 12, 2020
Bought on sale. Didn't work. May sound good, but there is no *easy* way to "build" brain "power." Not saying it won't work 4 you, but as the video shows, not long ago, a guy I know had an adverse reaction after the umpteenth time he repeated the offering of brain exercises in one day.
April 13, 2020
Despite the promising name this book fails to really explain how to boost fluid intelligence. 80% of this book is just the author trying out programs that he believes will help increase fluid intelligence while adding commentary. There’s only one chapter that goes into the techniques to improve performance and even that chapter doesn’t go into a lot of detail. I’m disappointed but the commentary was entertaining.
October 27, 2025
I still did not understand why they have taken such a stand against the large and growing body of evidence showing that working memory and fluid intelligence can be increased through training.
(Because it mostly wasn't very good evidence, Dan.)
Gladwellian (i.e. chatty overinterpretation of immature social science) with a side dose of uninteresting self-experimentation. More than half of this is about brain training, which has unfortunately lost most of its scientific veneer in the five years since it was published. (Here are some large negative meta-analyses.) To some extent this is not his fault - I did n-back for a while myself in 2013, and he cites all the top people (he's in love with credentials and committee memberships). But the crisis made a mockery of many top people. They crowed about lifting the 'curse of learning specificity' (that no training regime seems to produce a general increase in fluid intelligence). The curse has since reasserted its gloom.
He makes dozens of errors of interpretation (for instance, the Abecedarian preschool programme which he enthuses about made no long-term intelligence gains; for instance not distinguishing active and passive controls). And he gives no attention to the biggest interventions, quality sleep and education (3 points per year(!)). Also, music instruction for cognition didn't replicate.
Serves me right for reading a journalist on any topic but journalism, I suppose. He gives, I think, only one effect size, despite citing hundreds of studies in prose. There's only one moment where he does actual journalism and pushes back against the hasty commercialisation of immature science.
Useful as an example of how not to write about science; about the spurious omnicausal implications of low-power psychology studies; as a reminder that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence (and anything nonmedical to do with Gf gains is extraordinary); and maybe if you're interested in verbatim conference backbiting.
His self-experiment is invalidated before it starts (even as an n-of-one thing) because he decides to wake up early (again, the cognitive penalty of 2 fewer hours of sleep dwarfs the boosters' estimates of brain training + exercise + nicotine):
I... wrote out my training schedule. I would wake up at 6:00 a.m. instead of my usual 8:00 a.m.
His lowest moment: Trying to understand the balance of evidence about brain training and g, Hurley's meta-analytic method is to literally count the studies that found, or didn't find, a significant effect:
In the years following publication [of the original n-back study], a grand total of four randomized, controlled studies have been published finding no benefit of cognitive training... Yet in contrast, by my count, seventy-five other randomized, controlled studies have now been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals confirming that cognitive training substantially improves.
He tries to critique the 2013 meta-analysis, but is unable to, because he doesn't know how to estimate study quality, and crapness matters far more than quantity.
How to avoid finding ourselves in Hurley's position? Well, first off avoid writing a book about any young social science (n-back was 11 years old when he wrote this so the rule might have to be "more than a couple of decades old"). The lack of consensus (in a relatively nonpoliticised field) is another warning sign: not because science is quick at resolving bullshit disagreements, but because it means the effects can't be very large, are hiding in the background noise. The surprisingly large amounts of money the findings spurred probably didn't help with confirmation bias and hostility. Listen to the grumpy bastards (Randy Engle, mocked as a "defender of the [specificity] faith" in this, was right all along). Lastly, read the methodologists: Paul Meehl and others were warning us of the general statistical shoddiness of psychology more than forty years ago.
It's an important topic and he actually navigates the tricky nicotine vs tobacco literature well (spoiler: it's really good). But read Gwern and Examine instead. (I don't know of a good book on the matter.)
January 15, 2014
*A full executive summary of this book is available here: http://newbooksinbrief.com/2014/01/14...
The main argument: The idea that we can boost our brain power through interventions of various kinds has been around a long time. Over the years, numerous drugs, diets and other practices (including everything from physical exercise to learning a new language or musical instrument to meditation to even zapping the brain with electrodes) have been purported to pump up our mental strength. And lately, a new practice has been added to this list: brain-training games and exercises. Indeed, in the past decade a whole new industry has emerged around brain-training programs. Built on the premise that specific types of mental activities can strengthen our cognitive skills and add to general intelligence, companies such as Lumosity and LearningRx have convinced millions of paying customers that their product will give them an edge in the brains department.
The more skeptical among us, however, may find ourselves wondering just what is the scientific basis behind all these brain games and other interventions. It was just this thought that occurred to science writer Dan Hurley; and so, following his skeptical sense, Hurley decided to investigate the matter for himself. What Hurley found was a scientific field that, though young, is bustling with activity (and controversy).
The new science of building brain power may be said to have truly kicked off in 2002. In that year, Swedish psychologist Torkel Klingberg performed a study wherein he found that subjects diagnosed with ADHD improved in both attention span and general intelligence after undergoing a brain-training program that involved working-memory exercises (it was this very study that kick-started the brain training industry).
The finding flew in the face of the long-accepted belief that intelligence simply could not be enhanced through training; and therefore, it sparked a great deal of interest in the scientific community. Eager to test the new finding, scientists from all over the world launched their own studies. While not all of the studies replicated the results that Klingberg found, many did; and enough promising results were found to draw even more interest into the field (while those who found negative results began setting up a staunch opposition to the research).
Despite the minority opposition, the long-held belief in immovable intelligence was rocked, and scientists began testing other kinds of interventions as well (including all of those mentioned above). While many of the interventions tested were found to have no effect on cognitive functioning, some did, and thus the new field gained even more momentum.
Wanting very much to get to the bottom of the matter (and the controversy) Hurley decided to check out the studies himself, and also to interview the major researchers in the field (on both sides of the debate). Based on this investigation (which is explored at length in the book), Hurley launched his own brain-training experiment–on himself. Specifically, Hurley took all of those interventions which he felt had the best evidence behind them and incorporated them into a grand brain-training program to see whether he could improve his intelligence.
The routine included the following: A boot camp program (that incorporated both aerobic exercise and resistance training); Lumosity; learning a new musical instrument (the lute); mindfulness meditation; a nicotine patch; coffee; and transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS). The results of the experiment? They were mixed.
Hurley's exploration of the new field of building brain power (as well as his own experiment on himself) is fascinating (and often hilarious). One of the strong points of the book is how much detail Hurley gives regarding the experiments that he investigates. However, there is one detail that Hurley often leaves out that would be nice to have: rather than specifying exactly how much a given intervention improved intelligence in terms of percentages, Hurley often confines himself to mentioning whether the improvement was statistically significant or not (which leaves us without a good indication of exactly how well a given intervention worked). Still, Hurley's book is very well researched, and both highly interesting and entertaining. A great resource for those who are interested in getting past the hype of brain boosting, and investigating the actual science. A full executive summary of the book is available here: http://newbooksinbrief.com/2014/01/14... a podcast discussion of the book will be available soon.
The main argument: The idea that we can boost our brain power through interventions of various kinds has been around a long time. Over the years, numerous drugs, diets and other practices (including everything from physical exercise to learning a new language or musical instrument to meditation to even zapping the brain with electrodes) have been purported to pump up our mental strength. And lately, a new practice has been added to this list: brain-training games and exercises. Indeed, in the past decade a whole new industry has emerged around brain-training programs. Built on the premise that specific types of mental activities can strengthen our cognitive skills and add to general intelligence, companies such as Lumosity and LearningRx have convinced millions of paying customers that their product will give them an edge in the brains department.
The more skeptical among us, however, may find ourselves wondering just what is the scientific basis behind all these brain games and other interventions. It was just this thought that occurred to science writer Dan Hurley; and so, following his skeptical sense, Hurley decided to investigate the matter for himself. What Hurley found was a scientific field that, though young, is bustling with activity (and controversy).
The new science of building brain power may be said to have truly kicked off in 2002. In that year, Swedish psychologist Torkel Klingberg performed a study wherein he found that subjects diagnosed with ADHD improved in both attention span and general intelligence after undergoing a brain-training program that involved working-memory exercises (it was this very study that kick-started the brain training industry).
The finding flew in the face of the long-accepted belief that intelligence simply could not be enhanced through training; and therefore, it sparked a great deal of interest in the scientific community. Eager to test the new finding, scientists from all over the world launched their own studies. While not all of the studies replicated the results that Klingberg found, many did; and enough promising results were found to draw even more interest into the field (while those who found negative results began setting up a staunch opposition to the research).
Despite the minority opposition, the long-held belief in immovable intelligence was rocked, and scientists began testing other kinds of interventions as well (including all of those mentioned above). While many of the interventions tested were found to have no effect on cognitive functioning, some did, and thus the new field gained even more momentum.
Wanting very much to get to the bottom of the matter (and the controversy) Hurley decided to check out the studies himself, and also to interview the major researchers in the field (on both sides of the debate). Based on this investigation (which is explored at length in the book), Hurley launched his own brain-training experiment–on himself. Specifically, Hurley took all of those interventions which he felt had the best evidence behind them and incorporated them into a grand brain-training program to see whether he could improve his intelligence.
The routine included the following: A boot camp program (that incorporated both aerobic exercise and resistance training); Lumosity; learning a new musical instrument (the lute); mindfulness meditation; a nicotine patch; coffee; and transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS). The results of the experiment? They were mixed.
Hurley's exploration of the new field of building brain power (as well as his own experiment on himself) is fascinating (and often hilarious). One of the strong points of the book is how much detail Hurley gives regarding the experiments that he investigates. However, there is one detail that Hurley often leaves out that would be nice to have: rather than specifying exactly how much a given intervention improved intelligence in terms of percentages, Hurley often confines himself to mentioning whether the improvement was statistically significant or not (which leaves us without a good indication of exactly how well a given intervention worked). Still, Hurley's book is very well researched, and both highly interesting and entertaining. A great resource for those who are interested in getting past the hype of brain boosting, and investigating the actual science. A full executive summary of the book is available here: http://newbooksinbrief.com/2014/01/14... a podcast discussion of the book will be available soon.
February 5, 2014
The knee-jerk reaction on seeing this book was ‘it’s going to be rubbish’, as it is widely publicised that most commercial ‘brain training’ products have no more value than any activity that keeps the mind active, from reading a book to chatting to a next-door neighbour. And while an active mind is valuable in keeping alert in old age, it gives no advantages in terms of ‘brain power’ whether you consider that as IQ or something a bit more subtle.
In fact, I needn’t have worried, because Dan Hurley is aware of this, and is approaching a very specific aspect of training, using an intense methodology, which has shown some interesting results in proper scientific testing.
Along the way, he decides to see if he can enhance his own brain, so takes a MENSA test, then engages in as many brain enhancing activities as he can before being re-tested – from physical exercise to a nicotine patch – which have been shown to have some benefit in mental acuity. Perhaps the most interesting bit of the book is where he assesses all the different possibilities, dismissing some (eating the right thing, apart from drinking coffee, for instance) and taking others on board, all based on our best current science.
Another favourite is the final section, where we see played out a significant battle between academics, some sticking to the traditional argument that all training does is train you to be better at that particular test, some open to a wide range of possibilities. It’s interesting, apart from anything else, to show just how different theories are sometimes handled in the academic community.
The only part of the book I felt didn’t quite work was a longish section on Down’s syndrome, not because it wasn’t important or interesting, but because it didn’t quite fit with everything else, centred around Hurley’s personal test, and the result was that overall the book’s structure seemed a little haphazard.
As long as you don’t object too much to the author’s slightly patronising magazine writer’s style, that makes him feel the urge to put in a number of unnecessary personal descriptions (take for instance ‘Tall, blond and good-looking: in another words, a typical Swiss’), this should prove a fascinating read on a truly interesting topic.
In fact, I needn’t have worried, because Dan Hurley is aware of this, and is approaching a very specific aspect of training, using an intense methodology, which has shown some interesting results in proper scientific testing.
Along the way, he decides to see if he can enhance his own brain, so takes a MENSA test, then engages in as many brain enhancing activities as he can before being re-tested – from physical exercise to a nicotine patch – which have been shown to have some benefit in mental acuity. Perhaps the most interesting bit of the book is where he assesses all the different possibilities, dismissing some (eating the right thing, apart from drinking coffee, for instance) and taking others on board, all based on our best current science.
Another favourite is the final section, where we see played out a significant battle between academics, some sticking to the traditional argument that all training does is train you to be better at that particular test, some open to a wide range of possibilities. It’s interesting, apart from anything else, to show just how different theories are sometimes handled in the academic community.
The only part of the book I felt didn’t quite work was a longish section on Down’s syndrome, not because it wasn’t important or interesting, but because it didn’t quite fit with everything else, centred around Hurley’s personal test, and the result was that overall the book’s structure seemed a little haphazard.
As long as you don’t object too much to the author’s slightly patronising magazine writer’s style, that makes him feel the urge to put in a number of unnecessary personal descriptions (take for instance ‘Tall, blond and good-looking: in another words, a typical Swiss’), this should prove a fascinating read on a truly interesting topic.
August 29, 2022
I bought this book back in 2017 when I was living abroad and finally got round to reading it! I enjoyed this book, a fascinating journey into the world of what ‘intelligence’ is, and if we can actively improve our own. It seems that we possibly can, but like many abilities in life, there will be successes and failures, because we are all different, and no single path will suit everyone. Self improvement takes time and effort, and maybe some people are born with an advantage over others, but I think we can all benefit from training our minds, as we do our bodies. We just have to want to do it, and see a purpose in doing so, I think. Only then we will see the benefits.
February 16, 2019
Smarter would have been a great journalistic series but as a book it quickly shows its age, limited depth of research, and biased perspective. First of all, I'm not against the idea of general intelligence as the research surrounding its benefits are fairly robust. I can understand why it's a sensitive topic, but I also thinks it's important not to forget that it's only one variable that can contribute to beneficial outcomes in life (which thankfully is acknowledged by the author in the end).
Second, I'm enitirely for majority of the strategies purported to increase general intelligence in this book because they are simply beneficial to well-being and maintaining a healthy lifestyle (e.g., exercise, mindfulness, novel challenges). Where I'm skeptical is this: of course a well-oiled machine will generally run more efficiently. In fact, I would argue that the idea of restricted range is a better way of thinking about within person variability of performance on various intelligence tests. In general, scores of intelligence are fairly stable, but can vary depending on a wide range of factors that contribute to how any one individual will perform at any one time. If you habitually challenge yourself, are relatively healthy, and can quickly unwind intrusive thoughts and focus on the matter at hand, then you would probably perform better on intelligence tasks than if you never try new things, despise the idea of vigorous exercise, and let your mind wander endlessly. The thing is, these descriptions can describe one person at different points in time. If the person performs better in the former state versus the latter, does that mean they are more intelligent at one time versus another? Or is it a matter of other factors that strengthen or suppress the expression of general intelligence?
As for brain training games, it's about generalizability. If you play games that involve quickly thinking about percentages, of course you can improve your mental math abilities when thinking about how much to leave for a tip at a restaurant. However, each game has its narrow applicability with specific strategies that most likely do not generalize to other tasks of varying similarity. Nonetheless, if you enjoy them, go for it! It's about how you want to spend your time. In any case, I would only suggest this book to those very interested in the topic of intelligence, but there are better resources out there.
Second, I'm enitirely for majority of the strategies purported to increase general intelligence in this book because they are simply beneficial to well-being and maintaining a healthy lifestyle (e.g., exercise, mindfulness, novel challenges). Where I'm skeptical is this: of course a well-oiled machine will generally run more efficiently. In fact, I would argue that the idea of restricted range is a better way of thinking about within person variability of performance on various intelligence tests. In general, scores of intelligence are fairly stable, but can vary depending on a wide range of factors that contribute to how any one individual will perform at any one time. If you habitually challenge yourself, are relatively healthy, and can quickly unwind intrusive thoughts and focus on the matter at hand, then you would probably perform better on intelligence tasks than if you never try new things, despise the idea of vigorous exercise, and let your mind wander endlessly. The thing is, these descriptions can describe one person at different points in time. If the person performs better in the former state versus the latter, does that mean they are more intelligent at one time versus another? Or is it a matter of other factors that strengthen or suppress the expression of general intelligence?
As for brain training games, it's about generalizability. If you play games that involve quickly thinking about percentages, of course you can improve your mental math abilities when thinking about how much to leave for a tip at a restaurant. However, each game has its narrow applicability with specific strategies that most likely do not generalize to other tasks of varying similarity. Nonetheless, if you enjoy them, go for it! It's about how you want to spend your time. In any case, I would only suggest this book to those very interested in the topic of intelligence, but there are better resources out there.
January 14, 2014
Can we make ourselves smarter? Dan Hurley tries to answer that question by first interviewing many intelligence researchers and then trying the most promising strategies himself. This involves everything from exercising to learning the renaissance lute to wearing a nicotine patch. The results include some actionable advice and lots of fun stories.
As a scientist, I think we need more people like Dan Hurley – one for every subject! The first half of this book contained the same information as a review article for the field of intelligence research. It read like a story. The research was explained clearly and simply for a general audience. Areas where scientists disagree or are uncertain were clearly distinguished from known facts. And in a brilliant move that gave this section a narrative, the research is explained as the author shares his experiences talking to researchers. Conversations, first-hand views of research labs, and witty asides keep this potentially dry section moving right along.
The second half of the book describes the author application of what he learned to his own life. This included adding a lot of things to his daily routine, so it was both hectic and humorous. I appreciated that the author made it clear his results were unique to him. No conclusions were drawn from his sample size of one. It did, however, make for a good story. It also gave the author more room to include his experiences with different brain-training techniques. I would love to see more fields of research summarized in such an accessible way. Highly recommended for anyone who likes books with lots of fun facts, who appreciates accurate science, or who has wondered if we can learn to be smarter.
This review first published on Doing Dewey.
As a scientist, I think we need more people like Dan Hurley – one for every subject! The first half of this book contained the same information as a review article for the field of intelligence research. It read like a story. The research was explained clearly and simply for a general audience. Areas where scientists disagree or are uncertain were clearly distinguished from known facts. And in a brilliant move that gave this section a narrative, the research is explained as the author shares his experiences talking to researchers. Conversations, first-hand views of research labs, and witty asides keep this potentially dry section moving right along.
The second half of the book describes the author application of what he learned to his own life. This included adding a lot of things to his daily routine, so it was both hectic and humorous. I appreciated that the author made it clear his results were unique to him. No conclusions were drawn from his sample size of one. It did, however, make for a good story. It also gave the author more room to include his experiences with different brain-training techniques. I would love to see more fields of research summarized in such an accessible way. Highly recommended for anyone who likes books with lots of fun facts, who appreciates accurate science, or who has wondered if we can learn to be smarter.
This review first published on Doing Dewey.
August 14, 2014
An enjoyable read, but then I take great interest in these sorts of books. Reading through the first chapter, I thought, "wow, this is amazing! Except, I wonder what Randall Engle would say?" (I actually did ask myself that) Not to worry because Dan Hurley represents most all of the sides on the debate in this book. For reference, I knew going in that Randall Engle had tested and shown that working memory could be expanded but that fluid intelligence remained unchanged. I didn't realize that if I just turned the page to chapter two, he'd be featured prominently there and throughout as the book's antagonist.
There is one minor question, potentially an issue, that I have. In chapter four, Hurley mentions a study that found a negative correlation between prenatal fish oil supplementation and child IQ. Because this finding is so counter-intuitive, I have a lot of questions about it, such as: Was the sample size significant? Were the IQ difference significant? What factors were controlled for? etc. None of those questions were answered in the book and yet Hurley comes right out and says, "for now, at least, no solid body of scientific evidence proves that any other dietary intervention makes a difference to intellectual abilities -- other than fish oil supplementation for pregnant women, which actually looks harmful for infants' development." (p 75)
For what it's worth, I'd expect at least no significant correlation or a very minor positive one; not a negative one.
I'll have to do a little digging in the notes and will edit the review the best as I can.
There is one minor question, potentially an issue, that I have. In chapter four, Hurley mentions a study that found a negative correlation between prenatal fish oil supplementation and child IQ. Because this finding is so counter-intuitive, I have a lot of questions about it, such as: Was the sample size significant? Were the IQ difference significant? What factors were controlled for? etc. None of those questions were answered in the book and yet Hurley comes right out and says, "for now, at least, no solid body of scientific evidence proves that any other dietary intervention makes a difference to intellectual abilities -- other than fish oil supplementation for pregnant women, which actually looks harmful for infants' development." (p 75)
For what it's worth, I'd expect at least no significant correlation or a very minor positive one; not a negative one.
I'll have to do a little digging in the notes and will edit the review the best as I can.
April 26, 2018
Definitely it was an educational and interesting read on developing fluid intelligence and working memory. There is a lot of discussion around the topic some researchers think it is not even possible, that intelligence is set by our genes and we can't do anything about it. Others believe it is somewhat possible and are searching ways to increase working memory capacity. There is increasing amount of evidence that it might be possible but effect sizes are still quite small. Bigger effects have been found for lower baseline working memory capacity witch indicates that cognitive training helps most those who need it most. But it is still young research area.
I wound that I really enjoy these journalistic type of books where the author does his/hers research, interviews relevant people and expands their understanding of a given topic. About this book I was happy to find that the discussion was really well balanced and cited. The author also conducted an experiment on himself and tried most of the scientifically proven ways of increasing the brainpower. He tried N-back task, Lumosity cognitive training program, exercising, learning to play an instrument, transcranial electrical stimulation and even nicotine patches. But his is results all together were modest. But I still think that the area might provide a new way to help people with cognitive impairment in the future.
I wound that I really enjoy these journalistic type of books where the author does his/hers research, interviews relevant people and expands their understanding of a given topic. About this book I was happy to find that the discussion was really well balanced and cited. The author also conducted an experiment on himself and tried most of the scientifically proven ways of increasing the brainpower. He tried N-back task, Lumosity cognitive training program, exercising, learning to play an instrument, transcranial electrical stimulation and even nicotine patches. But his is results all together were modest. But I still think that the area might provide a new way to help people with cognitive impairment in the future.
March 8, 2014
It's an ok review of the topics, a quick read, but not very scientific or detailed. It's got a lot of padding about his experimentation on himself, which was basically unsuccessful. Might be worth it if you aren't already familiar with the topics (n-back, meditation, nootropics, etc) but if you are, you probably already know more than what's in this book.
April 26, 2014
This writing of this book bounced between glib and tedious. It drew no firm conclusions other than the obvious: exercise is good for the mind, playing a musical instrument is rewarding, brain games are mildly stimulating. The author is not a good science writer.
January 26, 2021
I really enjoyed most of this book, but the last couple of chapters were a bit of a slog. It seemed the author felt the need to give us the results of every relevant recent study on the topic at the end, even though he had very thoroughly (and more interestingly, in my opinion) walked us through the predominant major opposing theories and how they came about. He did appear to have quite a bias based on his thoughts/feelings and, given that I was reading his words, it appeared convincing to be on his "side" of the coin, but he definitely didn't present the ideas/characters of the different researchers impartially, so who's to say how I would have felt had I been presented the information from someone in the opposing camp's point of view. To me, it seemed the author had made his point on the contentions between the two major lines of thought on the issues related to the topic to a sufficient degree before running through all the additional studies he did in his later chapters. His afterward seemed to give us a lot of interesting info that probably would have been valuable in the original writing and possibly have removed the need for the lengthy run-down of negative findings in the last few chapters. His results from his follow-up tests weren't quite as thrilling as I was hoping they'd be given the lengthy (whole book) build-up. They did make me curious about what the MENSA IQ test would say if I took it. I might need to borrow someone's ID to do my own experiment 😜
February 10, 2023
"Smarter" by Dan Hurley is a book that delves into the scientific debate around increasing human intelligence. The author presents a wealth of information on past and present methods, tools and tests that claim to improve cognitive function. However, the book falls short in terms of holding the reader's interest. Despite the intriguing topic, the author's writing style is bogged down by too much unnecessary information and long-winded descriptions of people he interviews.
One of the major drawbacks of the book is that it does not provide conclusive evidence on the effectiveness of brain training. Some scientists argue it works, but their studies do not support their claims. The author's own personal anecdote provides evidence of both decline and only negligible improvement, adding to the inconclusiveness of the topic.
The book also leaves several important questions unanswered, such as the impact of physical exercise and healthy eating habits on the brain. Despite this, the author acknowledges scientists look at their data to determine the truth, but in the end, the data proves nothing conclusively.
Overall, "Smarter" by Dan Hurley is an informative read for those interested in the scientific debate around increasing intelligence, but the book lacks a strong narrative and conclusive evidence, making it a struggle to stay engaged with the material.
One of the major drawbacks of the book is that it does not provide conclusive evidence on the effectiveness of brain training. Some scientists argue it works, but their studies do not support their claims. The author's own personal anecdote provides evidence of both decline and only negligible improvement, adding to the inconclusiveness of the topic.
The book also leaves several important questions unanswered, such as the impact of physical exercise and healthy eating habits on the brain. Despite this, the author acknowledges scientists look at their data to determine the truth, but in the end, the data proves nothing conclusively.
Overall, "Smarter" by Dan Hurley is an informative read for those interested in the scientific debate around increasing intelligence, but the book lacks a strong narrative and conclusive evidence, making it a struggle to stay engaged with the material.
July 10, 2025
The discovery of neuroplasticity opened door to different understanding of reality and potential for our brain.
Mr. Hurley said his IQ was 136, and he decided to improve it. I have some strange feeling that he has not completed his multiple projects as planned. He described current research into the subject in very detailed way, and set plan about what he was to do. He described the first few days, but then suddenly jumped to the research. It is my belief that with very high IQ comes this lack of persistence and easiness of getting bored. Perhaps it's my bias. He claims that he completed almost all projects except for meditating, but I don't believe it. There was also indication that people with very low IQ will profit the most from described efforts. The author's IQ moved up but a few points.
This science is still very new. As I looked at what is required, I realized that it is very time and effort consuming, and probably feasible if one wants to stop Alzheimer, dementia or ADHD, but people who have choice and life to live (jobs, family, etc.) can find it too demanding.
Mr. Hurley said his IQ was 136, and he decided to improve it. I have some strange feeling that he has not completed his multiple projects as planned. He described current research into the subject in very detailed way, and set plan about what he was to do. He described the first few days, but then suddenly jumped to the research. It is my belief that with very high IQ comes this lack of persistence and easiness of getting bored. Perhaps it's my bias. He claims that he completed almost all projects except for meditating, but I don't believe it. There was also indication that people with very low IQ will profit the most from described efforts. The author's IQ moved up but a few points.
This science is still very new. As I looked at what is required, I realized that it is very time and effort consuming, and probably feasible if one wants to stop Alzheimer, dementia or ADHD, but people who have choice and life to live (jobs, family, etc.) can find it too demanding.
November 2, 2017
Book that gives an overview of research that attempts to answer if we can train ourselves to be smarter.
Dan Hurley goes through the research and tries to identify a handful of things to try on himself to make himself smarter. The things he introduces into his life are exercise, learning a musical instrument, brain training games, nicotine, meditation, and transcranial direct-current stimulation. He ends up not sticking with meditation.
Most of the book is spent presenting the scientific debate around trying to make people smarter. Can you train yourself with a game to get smarter in general and not just better at the game? Can you improve your general working memory in a way that increases your fluid intelligence? Is fluid intelligence different from working memory?
I thought this was a pretty interesting book and would recommend it. If you want a more solid summary of the book this review contains more details.
Dan Hurley goes through the research and tries to identify a handful of things to try on himself to make himself smarter. The things he introduces into his life are exercise, learning a musical instrument, brain training games, nicotine, meditation, and transcranial direct-current stimulation. He ends up not sticking with meditation.
Most of the book is spent presenting the scientific debate around trying to make people smarter. Can you train yourself with a game to get smarter in general and not just better at the game? Can you improve your general working memory in a way that increases your fluid intelligence? Is fluid intelligence different from working memory?
I thought this was a pretty interesting book and would recommend it. If you want a more solid summary of the book this review contains more details.
August 27, 2019
The book is a lucid read on man’s endevour to increase one’s intelligence . The concepts of stored memory , working memory and fluid intelligence help one understand how our brain manages memory and intelligence and Dan opens our eyes to various theories and research going on in this regard.
The author goes through the process of experimenting the various tools including the nicotine patch apart from doing the N-back test , Luminosity , Physical Exercise and studying a new instrument to increase his IQ scores . Well he even tries the electric shock . The author concludes that consistency is the key behind improvement and there is an effect on Intelligence but necessarily not measurable. In conclusion it is the way we live our lives that defines our intelligence and through persistence and consistency we can get smarter.
The author goes through the process of experimenting the various tools including the nicotine patch apart from doing the N-back test , Luminosity , Physical Exercise and studying a new instrument to increase his IQ scores . Well he even tries the electric shock . The author concludes that consistency is the key behind improvement and there is an effect on Intelligence but necessarily not measurable. In conclusion it is the way we live our lives that defines our intelligence and through persistence and consistency we can get smarter.
July 25, 2025
This book was really good (may update my rating to 5 stars). It discusses different types of intelligence (crystallized vs fluid), working memory, whether people can train to be smarter (what does that really mean anyway?), etc.
Crystallized intelligence is what we consider wisdom, increasing as we age and have more experiences to draw from. Fluid intelligence (including noticing patterns) peaks in the late teens and 20s and declines with age - this explains why (generally) younger people are able to learn new things quicker.
Ironically, I think my ability to notice patterns has increased as I got older.
Crystallized intelligence is what we consider wisdom, increasing as we age and have more experiences to draw from. Fluid intelligence (including noticing patterns) peaks in the late teens and 20s and declines with age - this explains why (generally) younger people are able to learn new things quicker.
Ironically, I think my ability to notice patterns has increased as I got older.
September 20, 2018
Some scientists say brain training works, but then their studies don't support their view. Others flat n say it works in certain cases. Some say it doesn't work, but then say that it does. The author's personal anecdote provides evidence of both decline and only negligible improvement.
After 240 pages of arguing against itself, we determine that brain training doesn't work. Maybe. Probably not. Well, for some. Maybe.
The narrative is fine. It's sort of interesting, but it feels like it meanders through loosely related topics and doesn't seem to want to stand behind its own conclusion.
After 240 pages of arguing against itself, we determine that brain training doesn't work. Maybe. Probably not. Well, for some. Maybe.
The narrative is fine. It's sort of interesting, but it feels like it meanders through loosely related topics and doesn't seem to want to stand behind its own conclusion.
November 6, 2016
A great review of the contradicting evidence trying to answer if brain training works. Hurley is not proposing a scientific study but submits himself to all the scientifically proven potential intelligence enhancers to see if he can boost his IQ. There are no easy answers as he interviews PHDs with contradicting points of view. I downloaded the dual n back test after reading. My favorite section was on the brain's explore or exploit functions and how memory works.
October 25, 2018
A very detailed individual study into what are the current options for increasing your brain power, considering all pros and cons of every way, investigating scientific studies, both positive and negative, as well as describing Dan's own experience. The author does not draw conclusions, he gathered the data, talked to people, got first hand experience, and he lets the readers decide for themselves. Definitely recommended.
July 24, 2018
Listened to most of the book while running the Hawaii Kai Xtreme Ultra Run at 50km distance. Hurley researched different methods, techniques, substances that could make you smarter. He tried almost all of them simultaneously! Then he tested his IQ and his brain function in a MRI. The results were surprising and his conclusions were thoughtful.
December 11, 2018
I lost my interest in reading this book when the author criticized researchers such as Dweck and Duckworth without providing supporting details and convincing arguments to his claims. Due to my lack of motivation I missed the relevance or the call-to-action in this title.
March 15, 2019
I struggled after the few chapters to stay interested in this book. The topic was interesting but I just felt like there was so much unnecessary info that I zoned out. Not to mention, there wasn’t much of a conclusion even tho the book was extremely biased it was super vague at the end.
March 19, 2024
very good. I cannot try all Dan did, but the book has motivated me to learn a second language, something I have been wanting for a long time.
I am sure more developments will come out in this area, so it may be exciting to watch it unfold.
I am sure more developments will come out in this area, so it may be exciting to watch it unfold.
June 8, 2024
first thing on my summer to-do list: play more N-back games and more brain games that will up my fluid intelligence
really intelligent book?! towards the middle, the research and scientific discussions are somewhat boring but reading the arguments were kinda fun still.
some solid nonfiction
really intelligent book?! towards the middle, the research and scientific discussions are somewhat boring but reading the arguments were kinda fun still.
some solid nonfiction
April 16, 2018
I zoned out several times while listening and I felt no need to go back and listen again. It seemed very much like a long TEDtalk.
June 26, 2018
Got bored. Must have a low IQ.
November 3, 2018
This was a fast, fun, easy read which gave me some information I didn’t know on brain training.
November 24, 2018
Very profound view of intelligence and "smarts". It was inspiring for me, but ultimately the study of intelligence and the brain is still fuzzy... I enjoyed the book immensely.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 115 reviews